About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the fact that policy is our means, and they are not ends. we think we were for the court taxes or spending restraint, but those are policies we advocate. they're not what we're really for. what we're for are the good things that these policies will yield to the american people. what we're really for is the kind of society that those policies would allow the american people to create -- together. there is one idea too often missing from our public debate, it is that idea, together. in the last few years we conservatives seem to have abandoned words like together, compassion, and community, as if they're only possible meanings were as some sort of secret code for stateism. collective action does not only or even usually mean government action. conservatives cannot surrender the idea of community to the left when it is the vitality of our committees upon which our entire philosophy ultimately depends. nor can we allow one politician's occasional conflation of compassion and bigger government to discourage us from emphasizing the moral code of our world view. conservatism ultimately is not abo
, cutting spending in the tax code, and then i think it also keeps our promises to people to seniors who worked hard their whole life and want to nothing more than a secure retirement. and to our veterans to 0 who we made promises as they donned the uniform and fought for our country. >> host: what about the issue of changed cpi. . >> guest: i start with a basic notion that social security has enci ad itbutedp our shben ttal n part of the discussion. certainly we need to be concerned about the long-term solvent sei of social security but again when retirement security is question mark for so many families. i don't think it should be on the table during this part of the discussion during the budget resolution. look at the real contributors to our deficit and debt as we try tackle those challenges. >> host: two final questions before we go to calls. callers are ready. this is another article during an intimate dinner with democratic senators. how come you were left off the list? [laughter] >> guest: i have no idea. [laughter] but i have been very pleased with the president's increase in ou
the u.s. senate returns to work. debate on the internet sales tax bill. at 2:15 eastern. that's on c-span2 and now to the house floor here on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. the house returns from a long weekend meeting with constituents as our nation continues to process of the impact of dramatic explosions in boston and texas. concerns about budget, taxes, immigration, gun violence, among others, reveal the considerable divisions both in congress and among the american populous as well. as opinions and emotions surge loudly and with little indication of easy solution, we take this quiet moment to ask your blessing upon the members of this people's house. give each member peace and quiet discernment to work toward common solutions that might ease our divisions and open the way to new hope and confidence that we as a nation will continue to shine as an example for all the world to immolate. may all that is done th
in the shadows -- republicans said they have to earn their way on that path. pay their taxes. have a job. learn english. it will not be easy. they have to earn their way. those are the basic principles that started this conversation. i think there were about money for meetings that took place as it came together to talk about all of the issues that are part of this 800 less page bill. it is not perfect, but it is a good faith, common sense approach to fixing a badly broken immigration system. there are several reasons why we are here and why i'm here. first, the american people want us to do something. the notion that we would and this process with the same broken immigration system is unacceptable. we believe that we have come up with a good approach, one that would make the country safer and more. second, i want to talk about an issue that touches my heart. that is the dream act. this is an issue which means the world to me and to many young people across this country. i want to thank my colleagues. the evening that we set aside for the dream act was a short meeting. everyone said it was time
workers pay payroll taxes into a trust fund. all employers pay the same payroll tax into that trust fund and out of that trust fund comes all of the spending or part a services primarily hospital insurance spending. the age i trust funds has exceeded revenue since 2007 and what that means it is the balance of the trust fund and the assets of the trust fund have been declining and they will be totally completed sometime in the middle of the next decade. since the trust fund can't borrow if the laws are changed medicare will be unable to pay full payments for charges in the age i trust fund. it will only be able to reimburse providers 85% of what they are charging. so clearly legislative action has to be made before that he either to raise taxes or slow the growth in spending or preferably a little bit of both. i my reckoning i have completed my assignment and rather than take a gold star as i said i want to have a couple of general observations. the first when we have discussiodiscussio ends like this we should make clear what our goal this. if our goal is to moderate the growth of medica
put your finger on what we are trying to stay thougertain tax -- certairorize us some kid gets sin street and that terrorizes me because i live here. but that definition in webster has a connection to all legal definitions in that it is a political act. and generally, a political act against noncombatants. one military unit shoots another military unit. that is regular warfare. but when you intentionally attacked civilians for a political purpose, i think everybody agrees that was terrorism we have several elements here in boston. what we do not yet know is whether there was a political purpose. we are assuming there was, but we do not know they're wet -- that for a fact yet. host: someone on twitter reminds us that it was a pressure cooker believed to contain the bomb. likean see what this looks in the new york daily news. what is significant about this to you as we talk about such an easily homemade, crude instrument. guest: ball bearings, nails, pressure kircher ramallah -- pressure cooker, items you can go by this afternoon. look at what timothy mcveigh used, diesel fuel and fe
of it comes from the drug trailed. some probably 35 or 40%. some money comes from illicit taxes from afghan people and some money comes from external support from outside the region. >> when you look at the places that they go in pakistan, the frontier areas, double pakistan, number one, has control over those areas and number two, can control over those areas? >> senator, pakistan does not have control over those areas right now. they have had over 15,000 killed and wounded in operations in that area over the past decade. they've had hundreds killed and wounded in the past kefrl weeks that is -- as they've tried to gain control in the khyber area. i think that's a clear indication they cannot control the border area and the taliban that are operating freely inside of that border area. >> what do you see as a rule for the taliban, if any, in the future afghan government as we transition out, as discussions are taking place. how do you envision that future afghan government? obviously there are elections coming up but how are we looking at the transition for the afghan government? >> the sta
possessed in this country? and who would pay for it? would gun owners be subject to still more fees or taxes for exercising their second amendment rights? who would have access to the so-called registry? would the public know who owns guns and who does not? who would ensure that this sensitive information is protected and not used for political purposes, and how? we do not know the answers to these questions, but we do know that such restrictions will not prevent the next tragedy. we should not start down this dangerous road. what should we do instead? i have a few suggestions. instead of undermining the second amendment, mr. president, congress should focus its attention on three areas. first, i believe that robust prosecution of violent criminals is the best deterrent for violent crime. prosecutors should punish to the fullest extent of the law individuals who misuse guns, knives or anything else to commit violent crimes. there should be no leniency, mr. president, what ever for the commission of such crimes. secondly, we should examine and address any deficiencies -- and we have them -- i
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)